[DCRM-L] (no subject)

[John Lancaster]

Assuming you're thinking in terms of an OCLC record, their guidelines state:

"Specific differences in the wording of the title proper (other than those noted above) justify a new record."

Though this involves only a few letters, the differences occur in two of the first three words and is thus significant for searching.  And they are certainly "specific differences" that don't fall into any of the exceptions noted (which all involve judgment calls).

I suspect ESTC would also create a new record, but I don't know that there are published criteria to refer to.

John Lancaster


On May 10, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Deborah J. Leslie wrote:

> I can't decide whether to create a new record.
>  
> http://estc.bl.uk/R7161
>  
> The situation: I have in front of me a copy with the same setting of type as represented by the above record, but with a completely different setting of the t.p. and some resetting of the preliminaries. This state seems to be unknown, and I suspect it's the earlier than either of the two states recognized in the ESTC record, since it has no errata at the end of the preface.
>  
> The problem: In my copy, the title transcribes differently. "Francisci Willughbeij Armigeri" instead of "Francisci Willughbeii [but should be Willughbeij acc. to practice of the printer] Armig." My copy doesn't qualify as a new edition or issue, just a variant state of preliminaries. But the difference in title proper transcription gives me pause.
>  
> Thoughts? Advice?
>  
>  
> Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Head of Cataloging, Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 East Capitol St., S.E. | Washington, D.C. 20003
> djleslie at folger.edu | 202.675-0369 | http://www.folger.edu  
>